


^ "^^ y^"^ '"' 



k 
?: 



,0' \-^^-\/ "°^--.^-/ **/^.-'*/ 

* 1 















1 




FORCE BILL. 



J 4 A ' *^ 

)^''--(^4^^ /'f^y 



0L 



OF' 



u si>EEOH /s^r:^^?^ 



*^V/; 



HON. THOMAS S. BO^lf 




OF VIRGINIA. 



DELIVERED IN THE HOUSE OP REPRESENTATIVES, FERBUARY 20 AND 21, 1861. 



The bill to authorize the President to call out the military force of the country, and 
to accept of volunteers in certain cases, having been called up for consideration — 

■ Mr. BOCOCKsaid: 

Mr. Speaker: Before I proceed with the discussion of this bill, 
I ask that it maj' bo read at the Clerk's desk, and that the mem- 
bers of the House will give to it their attentive consideration. 

The bill was then read, as follows; 

" Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Represe7itativcs of the United States of America 
in Congress assembled, That the provisions of an act approved the 28th day of February, 
in the year 1795, entitled " An act to provide for calling forth the militia to execute the 
laws of the Union, suppress insurrections, and repel invasions, and to repeal the act now 
in force for those purposes," and of the act approved the 3d day of March, in the year 
1807, entitled '' An act authorizing the employment of the land and naval forces of the 
United States incases of insurrections,'' are hereby extended to the case of insurrections 
against the authority of the United States. 

Sec. 2. And be it further enacted, That the President, in any cage in which it may be 
lawful to use either the militia or the military and naval force of the United States for 
the purpose aforesaid, may accept the services of such volunteers as may offer their ser- 
vices, as cavalry, infantry, or artillery, organized in companies of the maximum stand- 
ard, squadrons and regiments, respectively, according to the mode prescribed for the or- 
ganization of the respective arms in the military establishment of the United States ; 
and it shall be lawful for the President to commission the officers of such companies, bat- 
talions, squadrons, and regiments, in their respective grades, to continue till discharged 
from the service of the United States ; and such volunteers, while in the service of the 
United States, shall be subject to the rules and articles of war, and shall be entitled to 
same pay and emoluments as officers and soldiers of the same grade in the regular service. 

Mr. BOCOCK. It is an ungracious task, Mr. Speaker, in a body 
like this, to oppose one's self in debate to what is evidently a fore- 
gone conclusion. When I remember the circumstances under which 
this bill was introduced, the disposition manifested to cut off de- 
bate, and the votes already taken in relation to it, I cannot doubt 
the purpose of the dominant party here to hurry it through to its 
final passage. Yet, sir, so strong are my objections to the bill, and 
80 grievous are the consequences, in my judgment, certain to flow 
from it, that I should not hold myself acquitted of my duty as a 
Representative of Virginia, or as a member of the Congress of the 
United States, if I failed to enter my earnest and solemn protest 
against it. 

Mr. Speaker, I oppose this bill on account of the features it con- 
tains, the consequences it will produce, and the policy it inaugu- 
rates.^ I characterized this bill, yesterday, as a *' declaration of 
war." I did so upon hearing it read at the Clerk's desk, and with- 
out sufficient opportunity to examine it. Having fully examined 
it, I say now, it is worse than a declaration of war. It clothes the 



I L 

2 * 'ioifi 

President, in time of peace, with dictatorial powers. I am not in 
the habit of expressing myself rashly, or in exaggerated terms ; 
and I would not now^ speak in such language of this bill if I did 
not believe that I can show to every unbiased mind that what I 
say is just. 

We have now upon the statute-book, Mr. Speaker, the acts of 
1795 and of 1807. Under these laws the President has ample au- 
thority to call out the regular militar}' power of the country, in 
case of invasion or danger of invasion from any foreign nation or 
Indian tribe ; also, in case of insurrection in any State against tlie 
Government thereof — in which case he shall act only upon the call 
of the Legislature of such State, if in session : or if not in session, 
then upon the call of the Governor. He has also the same power 
" whenever the laws of the United States shall be opposed, or the 
execution thereof obstructed in any State, by combinations too 
powerful to be suppressed by the ordinary course of judicial pro- 
ceedings, or by the powers vested in the marshals," &c. Now, sir, 
this power has heretofore been considered ample for every case 
which might arise under our Constitution. 

But this bill does more. It authorizes the President of the Uni- 
ted States to employ the entire military power of the country " in 
the case of insurrections against the authority of the United States." 
Insurrections against the authority of the United States ! What 
are they? What authority has the United States beyond the en- 
forcement of its laws ? Does the Constitution contemplate the em- 
ployment of the military power of the country except in the pro- 
secution of war, the enforcement of the laws, the repelling of in- 
vasion, and the suppression of insurrection against the government 
and laws of a State. ? 

The sixteenth clause of the eighth section, in article one of the 
Constitution, gives, as one of the powers of the Congress of the 
United States, the following : 

" To provide for calling forth the militia to execute the laws of the Union, suppress 
insurrections, and repel invasions." 

The phrases here employed are necessarily general in their na- 
ture, and were subject to be interpreted, and enlarged or restricted 
in their scope, by subsequent clauses in the Constitution. The 
power to use the military force of the country ''to execute the 
laws," was susceptible of easy limitation by the existing practice 
of the States, and by the usage under other liberal Governments, 
as well as by the general scope and purpose of our own Constitu- 
tion. The phrase " to repel invasions " was scarcely liable to dan- 
gerous misapprehension, for it necessarily implies an entry by a 
foreign Power with hostile intent ; and the repulsion of such entry 
could do hurt in no case. 

But the phrase "to suppress insurrections" was of a widely dif- 
ferent character. Insurrections by whom and against what ? It is 
easy to see that it might be construed so as to give a power which 
would overthrow and destroy the real character of our complex 
Government. In article four, section four, of the Constitution, it 
is provided that — 

" The United States shall guaratee to every State in this Union a republican form of 



3 

government, and shall protect, each of them against invasion ; and, on application of the 
Legislature or of the Executive, (when the Legislature cannot be convened,) against do- 
mestic violence." 

Now, here was, to some extent at least, an interpretation and 
limitation of the power. Here it is clearly implied that the Gene- 
ral Government shall not interfere in a State to suppress insurrec- 
tion against the State government, except on the call and in the 
support of State authorities. Now, unless the State should array 
itself against the General Government, this appears to be the only 
insurrection which could occur in a State without a violation of the 
laws of the United States. The power to suppress insurrections in 
a State is here fully exhausted. Nor can there be an insurrection 
in the District of Columbia without a violation of the laws of the 
United States. It seems that the power " to suppress insurrections" 
was given merely to authorize the General Government to act in 
aid of State authorities, even when its own laws were not opposed. 
The clause of article one is therefore interpreted and limited by 
section four of article four. 

If this reasoning is correct, every case in which the Government 
can constitutionally interfere to suppress insurrections, is already 
provided for. 

This view is sustained by what may be called the cotemporane- 
ous construction of the Constitution. If the meaning of the phrase 
is more comprehensive, how does it happen that no provision has 
been made or heretofore proposed for such cases. 
" Aaron Burr was believed by many to have plotted an insurrec- 
tionary movement against the Government of the United States, 
under Jefferson's administration. Massachusetts and Connecticut 
disobeyed the order of President Madison, when he called for their 
quota of militia for the war of 1812 ; and the State of Georgia re- 
fused compliance with a mandate of the Supreme Court, made in 
the celeb^ted Cherokee case, during the Presidency of General 
Jackson. Yet nothing of this sort was proposed in either case. 
Even in the days of South Carolina nullification, no proposition 
was made to give to the President the power to employ the military 
force of the country to suppress insurrections against the authority 
of the United St^es. If we go beyond the limitation already 
named, by what bounds will we terminate the extentof power con- 
ferred in the phrase to suppress insurrections against the authorities 
of the United States ? 

What is the authority of the United States ? i suppose it means 
the acts of its officers, which are authorized by law. Now, in this 
case, the President would be the sole judge of the acts authorized; 
and if he misjudged, there would be no restraint upon him from any 
other source. Should the President order a collector to reside in 
Charleston or Mobile, and he, for being an Abolitionist, should be 
driven out ; should the Postmaster General order a village post- 
master to distribute documents which might be regarded incendia- 
ry, and their distribution resisted ; these might be considered cases 
of insurrection against the authority of the United States, justify- 
ing a resort to the military power of the country to crush out op- 



4 

position'. Indeed, gentlemen declare constantly upon this floor that 
they regard the seceding States, each and every one of them, as in 
a state of rebellion or insurrection against the authority of the Uni- 
ted States. This bill would authorize the employment of the whole 
military force of the country to suppress the rebellious manifesta- 
tions of such States. It thus becomes, as has been said on this side 
of the House, a measure of positive and direct coercion against the 
seceding States. ISTow, it is well known that the right so to coerce 
was distinctly refused to the General Government in the convention 
which framed the Constitution. In all cases of conflict of views 
as to the authority of State and General Government, it would give 
the President the right of absolute decision ; because he might em- 
ploy the whole military force of the country to suppress, as insur- 
rection against his authority, all countervailing exercise of State 
power. Even where the municipal regulations of States seem to 
conflict with the authority of the General Government, they may 
be suppressed as insurrectionary. Thus would the whole genius of 
our system be violated and overthrown. The safeguards thrown 
around State rights will all prove vain and abortive. Under the 
Constitution and laws now in force, the General Government can- 
not interfere in the domestic troubles of a State, except in aid of 
State authority, and upon its call, nor to enforce the execution of 
hiw by military power, unless the ordinary process of judicial pro- 
ceedings shall prove insufiicient. Pass this bill, and anything can 
be done which the President ma}' choose to consider a suppression 
of insurrection against the authority of the United States. 

Thus far, I have failed to notice the second section of the pro- 
posed bill. It authorizes the President to accept the services of 
volunteers to suppress insurrections against the authority of the 
United States, and to commission the officers of the companies. 
Now, under what clause of the Constitution can this be done? 
Is it under that clause which empowers Congress "to rai§e and sup- 
port armies?" It will scarcely be contended that volunteers are 
legitimately classed as part of the regular Army. If they may be 
called out or accepted as part of the militia, to execute the laws, 
suppress insurrections, and repel invasions, then the right to com- 
mission their officers is expressly reserved to the States. But why 
call for volunteers at all ? Are not the Army, Xavy, and militia 
sufficient for all legitimate purposes in time of peace ? 

What I have already pointed out would appear a sufficient stretch 
of power; but there is another view of the matter which makes 
the bill yet more odious. It will be remembered that the militia 
compose far the greater part, perhaps three-fourths, of the active 
men of the country. Nearly every man from eighteen to forty- 
five years of age constitutes part of the militia. Now, remember 
that the President may call out all these unde/ this bill, to sup- 
press anything which he may choose to consider an insurrection 
against the authority of the United States ; that is, in fact, at his 
will. When called out, they are under the rules and articles of 
war. Now, in what condition will this place them ? Article fifth 
of these rules and articles is in these words : 

" Any oflBcer or soldier who shall use contemptuous or disrespectful words against the 



D 

President of the United Siates, against the Vice President thereof, against the Congress 
of the United States, or against the chief Magistrate or Legislature of any of the United 
States in which he may be quartered, if a commissioned officer, shall be cashiered or 
otherwise punished, as a court-martial shall direct ; if a non-commissioned officer or 
soldier, he shall suffer such punishment as shall be inflicted on him by the sentence of a 
court-martial." 

Why, sir, this country, in its early history, was throw!i into a 
great commotion by what was called the ^'■sedition law.'' But what 
was that in comparison with this ? It was the little rain-drop com- 
pared with the rushing stream, the shadow of a flying cloud con- 
trasted with the darkness of midnight. The President of the Uni- 
ted States, under this bill, would have the power, I may say at bis 
option, to place nearly the whole of the eftective power of the 
country — all the men from eighteen to forty-five years of age — in a 
position in which they would be liable to court-martial for speak- 
ing disrespectful or contemptuous words against the President, Vice 
President, or Congress. 

Such, then, is this bill. It empowers the President of the United 
States, in addition to the regular forces of the country, to call forth 
the militia, and to accept volunteers to an unlimited extent, for an 
unlimited time, and to accomplish an indefinite purpose ; in the 
mean time to be under a most oppressive sedition law. 

]!Tow, Mr. Speaker, is this not to clothe the President with dicta- 
torial authority ? Pack your imagination, torture your invention, 
and can you devise anything which would give him more unlimit- 
ed power? 

It has been surmised by many that, with the conservatism of the 
southern States withdrawn, the dominant party in the northern 
States would quickly lapse into anarchy or despotism. But, sir, 
who would have dared to surmise that so soon, while a majority 
of the southern States still hold connection with them, they would 
seek by one bold bound to throw themselves into the arms of a 
military dictator? Yet, sir, here it is. We have now a consider- 
able par^of the regular Army stationed in this metropolis. We, 
the Representatives of the people, pass to and from our legislative 
duties by the bayonets of a standing army. Soldiers in full uni- 
form look down upon us from the galleries, and even stride with 
iron heel around this Hall. A few days ago we had a committee 
ot this House unanimously reporting that the pretext for this army 
here was unfounded. We had then reason to expect that the 
Lieutenant General of the Army would have the grace — shall I 
say the decency ? — to remove it, in great part, at least, from our 
midst? But, so far from that, he has even since then increased the 
number with which he guards the capital. In a few days this Ad- 
ministration will retire, and Mr. Lincoln will come in. He will 
have a considerable standing army already assembled here, subject 
to his orders. Pass this bill, and he will have the power to call 
out also the militia and volunteers of the United States to an un- 
limited extent. If he does not prove himself a military despot, it 
will be because he lacks the will, not because he wants the power. 

I do not know, Mr. Speaker, what the purposes of gentlemen 
are. The time has come when we owe it to each other to be frank 
and explicit. If gentlemen deliberately vote for this bill, the coun- 



try will scarcely be longer in doubt as to their plans and inten- 
tions. Such a bill, pressed upon us as this has been, is itself a preg- 
nant circumstance. One calm and quiet morning it came suddenly 
upon us and took us b}^ surprise. A motion to reject, made by 
myself, to mark our decided disapproval of the measure, was de- 
feated ; but the bill went over for the day. The next day, the gen- 
tleman from Ohio [Mr. Stanton] makes a calm, quiet, and plausi- 
ble speech in its behalf : intimates that the case is too plain to ad- 
mit of argument, and actually calls the previous question. This 
he agrees afterwards to relinquish, but seems to do so as a mere 
act of favor ; so lightly do they regard so im^portaut a matter as 
this. Smooth and unpretending and innocent does this bill ap- 
pear, as presented by its friends. But behold the little bombshell, 
round and smooth and harmless in appearance, but in its recesses 
are combustibles enough to blow up a nation. How humble and in- 
offensive was the first appearance of this bill in the House. So ap- 
peared the serpent in the garden of Eden, , without harm and with- 
out guile. But as Satan had concealed in his heart malice enough 
to destroy a world, so this bill conceals within itself elements suffi- 
cient to encompass the downfall of the country. We were told, if 
we would pass it, we would not indeed be injured, but that it 
would prove a wi!ie, safe, and salutary measure of defense. So was 
the woman told that, if she would eat of the forbidden fruit, she 
should not surel}^ die, but be made like unto gods, knowing good 
from evil. And so extraordinary, too, is the time at which this 
measure has been introduced. We have here in this city what is 
called a peace congress, consulting about terms of reconciliation 
and settlement. They have not yet come to any result. In many 
parts of the country the eyes of the people are turned anxiously 
upon them. Just in this state of the case in comes this herald of 
war, as inopportune as when Banquo's ghost seated itself at the 
festal board.. I would earnestly ask, whither are we tending? 

Thus far I have considered this bill only. It had been my inten- 
tion, Mr. Speaker, to have availed myself of the;i.''ineral discussion 
on the report of the committee of thirtj^-three to have spoken on the 
prospects before us. Events have been constantly changing the as- 
pect of afl'airs, and I have waited to see what definite shape they 
would ultimately take. Time has gone on, meanv^hile, and the ses- 
sion is wearing to its close. I shall probably havs no other oppor- 
tunity to speak at any length, and tlierefore I i^nall touch upon one 
or two topics which have important bearing upon the question now 
before us. 

We have before us the painful realit}- that the Union, as it existed 
at the beginning of this session, has been broken. We have a Gov- 
ernment in the Gulf States and a Government here. Things are in 
an unsettled condition. What will be thct ultimate position into 
which we shall all settle down, Heaven only knows. We cannot 
long remain as we are. The difficulty is, that we have in our sys- 
tem two different types of civilization, and the stronger has organ- 
ized to rule the weaker. The history of the world teaches that such 
a state of things must cease, else they cannot remain under the same 
Government. It was a great wrong in its inception, and I had 



hoped to see it abandoned long ago. I had hoped that when gen- 
tlemen of the Republican party realized the effect of their course, 
they would have given us such ample guarantees of equality and 
safety as would have insured that we should have no further war 
between the system of Afi'ican servitude and the system of what are 
called the free States. Had the}'- done so in time all would have 
been well. But, thus far, they have not only not done so, but 
shown an entire want of appreciation of the import of the 
crisis. 

The State of Virginia has a heart devoted to Union upon terms 
of equality and justice. She has fondly cherished and nursed the 
idea of procuring a basis upon which all the members lately belona;- 
ing to the family of States might reassemble in dignity, in honoi-, 
and in peace, at the same council board. Hence her late election, 
hence her proposition for a peace conference, hence her mediation 
between the Executive administration here and the seceding States. 
But Virginia, I think, is fast becoming satisfied, as I have been for 
weeks, that there is no hope from this Congress. She is told, how- 
ever, that these members do not represent the real feeling of the 
northern people, having been elected some time ago, and upon en- 
tirely different issues. She is asked to wait, but without peace she 
cannot wait. In proportion as she desires honorable and lasting 
Union, in that degree it is essential to her that there shall be peace. 
She should take her position with a view to secure it. If to go 
promptly with the Gulf States is the best position for that purpose, 
who will say that she should not do so ? For my part, sympathiz- 
ing in every desire for an honorable, equal, and lasting Union, and 
knowing that to obtain it honorable peace is absolutely essential, 
it has been the purpose nearest my heart during this session to 
secure it. 

The present state of things cannot last. Causes beyond our con- 
trol will compel a speedy change. Those whose interest, whose 
sympathy, whose destiny are the same, cannot long remain apart. 
Upon some basi ■' the South must be united, and with them I trust 
will ultimately go, in any turn of events, the middle free States and the 
north-western States. Virginia will continue to stretch Ibrth her 
arms to embrace the children of her bosom, her five northwestern 
daughters, and \/ill mourn ^f she finds them not. Things will take 
shape if we have peace. I have, therefore, been myself desirous 
that Virginia shoui ' take such position for the time as would en- 
able her most effectually to command it. Should we go, and peace 
be preserved, love of honorable union would remain unextinguished 
and unrepressed in our hearts. Whenever the northern States be- 
came ready to live with us on terms of perfect equality and mutual 
good will, our hearts again would bound towards them in fraternal 
sympathy and concord. Once let blood be shed, let war be fairly 
joined, let the bad passions of our people be thoroughly aroused, 
then farewell, a long farewell, to all hopes of Union. 

" We shall stand apart, our scars remaimng 
Like cliffs that have been rent asunder." 

Why, sir, the ill feeling engendered by our war of Independence 
is scarcely yet extinguished. But why speak of war ? Because you 



have this bill now under consideration, and others on your Calen- 
dar, or in the hands of your committees, ready to be brought for- 
ward. If you would give up all these force bills, let the seceding 
States go in peace, and put in train of progress measures of honor- 
able adjustment, giving guarantees of future equality, you would 
show, at this late hour, a returning sense of justice which would do 
much to reassure our people, and give better hopes of the future than 
if you should raise an army of a million men. The difficulty is, that 
you cannot agree to permit the seceding States to go in peace. Why 
not ? Gentlemen say that it will make the Government a rope of 
sand, leaving no assurance that it will not be broken, at any mo- 
ment. There will be assurance that it will not be broken if there be 
no cause — the very assurance which our fathers contemplated, but 
not the assurance of fear or offeree. How often has it been said 
that this Union cannot be held together by force ? From Thomas 
Jefferson to John Bell, it has been so declared by almost every 
prominent statesman who has lived in the country. Was it a rnere 
catchword, designed to serve a purpose, or was it an honest reality ? 
If it were a reality, then what means this late doctrine about trying 
the question whether or not we have a Government. If force can- 
not guarantee Union, what will be our guarantee ? I answer, inter- 
est and affection. The States must love the Union, and see their 
interests in its perpetuation. You can have, under our system, no 
other guarantee but this ; if you cannot rely on it, because you be- 
lieve the States will not act properly, then you discredit the great 
doctrine of popular government. A State is a people, in the proper 
political sense of that word. If she cannot be relied on to decide 
what government is best for her, of course her people are not com- 
petent to self government. The States came severally into this 
Union to seek their happiness and safety. If they find neither in 
the association, who would force them to stay? Do gentlemen ex- 
pect to continue to collect revenue out of those who have no part 
in our Government? Why then, I ask again, shall they not go in 
peace ? Are they so essential to the northern States that they can- 
not live without them ? Were burdens prepared for them by the 
dominant party, which they needs must impose ? Were rich spoils 
to be gathered which they will not surr^ider ? Does not the course 
of the dominant party, in this regard, strongly imply that they did 
intend in some way to make the seceding States sulDserve their sel- 
fish purposes, and submit to their unequal exactions ? 

But what marks the tyranny of this policy more strongly is, that 
those who most positively declare that these States must not go in 
peace, are at the same time most decided in their opposition to con- 
cession. And what reason do they give for their refusal ? They 
higgle about their party creed, and fear to violate some plank in 
the Chicago platform. Better, they say, to make war against the 
seceding States than give up any one of their principles. Though 
concesston implies a yielding up, or change of position, yet a suffi- 
cient argument against anything asked, which they do not wish to 
give, is, that it difters from the position they have assumed as a 
party. To say that a particular guarantee is not consistent with 
their construction of the Constitution, is no sufficient answer to a 

T^^m-^^>c^t^nn fn pllflTlO-P. thp. Cnnstlt.nfion. 



9 

And, sir, we see their President elect coming on to the seat of the 
Government to assume the robes of office, and what says he? Does 
he seem to have a heart to appreciate the difficulties that now sur- 
round us, and to sj^mpathize with the troubles of his countrymen ? 
ISTo, sir. He says no harm has been done ; that it is all a small mat- 
ter ; that _" nobody is hurt." The excitement is all artificial ; it is 
but the fairy work of a midsummer night's dream. In the frolic of 
his indifference, he seems to mock at the troubles of the people. 
And what more does he do ? Does he show any spirit of relenting? 
Does he urge on his friends conciliation and concession, in this 
time of difficulty and trouble ? No, sir ; the idea is the furthest 
from him. Among all the gentlemen on the other side of the 
House, who have steeled their feelings and hardened their hearts 
against yielding any just terms of concession and guaranty, there is 
not one who has taken a more repulsive position than that taken 
by the President elect of the United States. He has said that, in 
regard to the tariff, the Chicago platform is law — not a law on the 
statute-books, but that higher law, binding upon the conscience, of 
which we have heard so much. And not only did he say that the 
tariff feature of the Chicago platform was law, but that all other 
features of the platform were law, and that he would have to be 
governed by them. 

Mr. SHEJRMAN. I trust the gentleman from Virginia, who is 
always candid, will do the Presid'ent elect the justice to say that, 
in stating what he did, he did nothing more than what every Pres- 
ident has done. Mr. Buchanan himself said that he was no longer 
James Buchanan, but the Cincinnati j^latform. I trust my friend 
will not find fault with the President elect for that. 

Mr. BOCOCK. Mr. Speaker, Mr. Buchanan was not called on, 
in assuming the robes of the presidential office, to meet such a crisis 
as this ; and all that the gentleman's explanation amounts to is, 
that with Mr. Lincoln, and, I fear, with the gentleman from Ohio, 
too, this is only an ordinary occasion ; and that the same rules of 
pohcy should govern them now as heretofore. Sir, I am not here 
to justify and defend Mr. Buchanan, or any other gentleman, in all 
his public and official conduct. All have their errors to lament. 
But I do say, from my personal knowledge of James Buchanan,' 
and from my information in relation to the various men who have 
held that high office before him, from the days of Washington to 
the present time, that there was scarcely one of them who, had he 
been placed in such a position as this, with this Union disrupted, 
with universal concern and anxiety spread broadcast throughout 
the country, would have turned and said : " It is a small matter. 
I shall regard the features of my party platform as the law of my 
conduct, not a whit of it to be surrendered, no iota to be abated. 
Yes, although the pillars of the temple of justice should fall, and 
thousands and tens of thousands and millions of men may be 
crushed beneath the ruins, although State after State may be forced 
to leave a once hallowed Union,"though civil war and internecine 
strife may devastate and desolate the fair face of our country, al- 
though the heavens may fall, I will maintain the articles o'f my 
party platform." I do not think that the friends of the President 



10 

elect pay him a high compliment when they pnt him in such a po- 
sition as that. Better forgot, at such a time, all considerations of 
party. I know that, in ordinarj^ times, we all cling to and desire 
party success. But in a great crisis like this, where party has en- 
dangered the country, it becomes the man, the hero, the statesman 
to stand out, make his mark, cast party and personal consequences 
aside, and risk everything for justice, right, and State equality. 
Look at the sacrifices made by the fathers of the country ; by your 
fathers, if you choose. Were they not conscientious men ? Did 
they not have scruples on this subject? Yet, when they came to 
make the Constitution of !I787, they agreed to give to the institu- 
tion of African slavery a large measure of protection. They agreed 
to protect it against unequal and oppressive taxation. They agreed 
to protect it against the danger of escape from one State into an- 
other. They even agreed, and some of them voted that the odious 
African slave trade might be continued, without interruption, for 
twenty years. This they did for the sake of union and peace. 
Contrast this action on their part with your position now. 

[Here the morning hour expired; and the House proceeded with 
other business.! 

THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 21, 1861. 

The bill to authorize the raising of volunteers, &c., being again under consideration — 

Mr. BOCOCK continued, as follows: 

Mr. Speaker : In the somewhat desultory remarks which I made 
yesterday, I argued that, under the Constitution of the United States, 
in addition to the war-making power, Congress has a right to pro- 
vide for calling out tlie military power of the couutr}' in three cases: 
1. To aid in the enforcement of the laws. 2. To suppress insur- 
rection. 3. To repel invasion. I contended, Mr. Speaker, that the 
word "insurrection," as employed in the first article of the Consti- 
tution, was afterwards interpreted by a clause in the fourth article 
to be "domestic violence," &c.; and it is there declared that the 
military power of tlie country should not be called out to interfere 
with domestic violence in any State except upon the call of the 
authorities of the State. So careful were the framers of the Consti- 
tution, that the General Government should not have the power to 
interfere in the aifairs of a State except upon the call of the State, 
and in aid of the State autliorities. 

I argued further, ISIr. Speaker, that this left no room for the 
phrase employed in this bill, and that no such thing vvas known to 
the Constitution of the country as the right of Congress to author- 
ize the President to call out the military powers of the country to 
suppress insurrection against the authority of the United States. 

I argued, further, that the phrase " insurrection against the au- 
thorities of the United States " was a wide and sweeping phrase, to 
which it is almost impossible to give limits. I argued, further, that 
one great objection to the exercise of this power on the part of the 
President of the United States, besides the other objections which 
I named, was, that the President would have a right to call out the 



11 

militia, and to accept volunteers, not only for -an indefinite purpose, 
but for an unlimited time, and to an unlimited extent ; and that, 
while under his call, the^^ would not have the right to speak dis- 
courteously or contemptuously of the President, the Vice President, 
or the Congress of the United States. We would thus have upon 
us the most widely-extended and sweeping sedition law that was 
ever known in the history of the land. This act would clothe the 
President of the United States with dictatorial powers. 

The gentleman from Ohio. [Mr. Stanton,] who opened debate 
on this bill, asked how, if this power were not given, the public 
property in this District could be preserved against the invasion of 
armed bands from other States, say from the seceding States ? In 
answer to that, Mr. Speaker, I say that, if there be no authority in 
the Constitution of the country for the passage of this bill, it is in 
vain to suggest any other argument in its favor. You have not the 
right to do an unconstitutional thing because it may be a convenient 
thing. But has not the President of the United States the power 
already to protect property here? He has control of the Army and 
ISTavy. He has the power, if necessary, to station here as many of 
the regular troops of the countr}^ as he can concentrate at this 
point. Then we are the local Legislature for the District. We can 
provide for the calling out of its militia. If armed bands should 
come from other States of the Confederacy, that would be inva- 
sion ; and under the power to repel invasion, the President has 
already a right to call out the militia of other States. 

Then what is the necessity for this bill ? All this I argued, yes- 
terday, somewhat at length. 

There is another point to which I wish now to call your attention 
for a short time. It is agreed that the military power, under the 
Constitution, ma}' pe employed to aid in the execution of the laws 
of the United States; but in what manner, and under what circum- 
stances? In the manner of war, or in the manner of peace? — for 
there is a manner of war and a manner of peace. A man commits 
a homicide, and attempts to escape. He is arrested and committed; 
then tried, and condemned to death. Your sheriff attempts, on the 
day appointed, to carry him to the place of execution, and a mob 
interferes. The military are called forth to aid the sheriff in the 
execution of the process to him directed, and repel the mob. That 
is the way of peace. But if, before the day of execution, or before 
the trial, the Executive should order the military to seize and decap- 
itate the offender, that would be hostility. In peace, courts adjudge 
rights and decide upon crimes ; the sheriff or marshal carries out 
their judgments. In war, the commander orders and the army exe- 
cutes. In peace, a particular process is to be executed ; in war, a 
particular strategetic point to be accomplished. In peace, the mil- 
itary power is subordinate to the civil, and used to aid it in the dis- 
charge of its legitimate dut}' ; in war, the military is employed in- 
dependently of civil authority, and to execute the order of its chief. 

Gentlemen lasij ask: how can you obtain civil process in seceded 
States, where you have no United States court ? The question is 
pertinent ; you cannot do it. And therefore I say that you cannot 
peaceably execute the laws in a seceded State. You must make 



12 

war; and that is of itself a recognition of the independence of the 
State warred against. Suppose you send your naan-of-war to 
Charleston, with a collector on board to collect revenue. The mer- 
chant vessel is seized, and held for the payment of duties. A dis- 
pute arises, and one of your officers is killed. By the Constitution, 
the offender is entitled to trial " by an impartial jury of the State 
and district wherein the crime shall have been committed." You 
must try him in South Carolina; but you have no court there, and 
cannot do so. 

This is one of the many illustrations to show that the whole 
working of our system rests on the consent of the State. And so, 
I say, that every force bill reported to the House, inasmuch as it 
provides for the employment of the military power independently 
of civil process, is therefore a war measure. So of the bill under 
consideration; so, also, of the bill of the gentleman from New 
York, [Mr. Reynolds,] and of the gentleman from Ohio, [Mr, 
Bingham.] They all provide for the use of the military power, 
independently of civil authority, in the enforcement of the laws, 
and are all war measures. 

And now, sir, permit me to say that I do not stand here autho- 
rized to speak for any State in a particular emergency, nor do I 
undertake to do it. t do know, however, that the State of Vir- 
ginia, which I have the honor in part to represent on this floor, 
stands committed by its declaration, as it is committed in honor 
and in interest, to resist a war of aggression on the southern States. 
Her people must do it. Why ? The very hand which they would 
aid in striking down South Carolina, or Alabama, would soon be 
uplifted to crush them, rendered weaker by having these States 
crippled and crushed. If these measures are to pass, I hesitate 
not to make the declaration, that in three months' time all the 
border slave States, with perhaps one or two exceptions, will find 
themselves standing side by side with the seceded States of the 
Union. Can Virginia, can Kentucky stand in the position in 
which they will be liable to have their militia called out — the more 
certainly because the nearest to the scene of action — to aid in 
making war against South Carolina, Alabanla, and Mississippi ? 
No, sir. .We cannot do it. We must, in such case, withdraw 
ourselves from the authority of this Government, and do what we 
can to destroy its power. We must cripple its Army, disintegrate 
the Navy, and crush the credit of the Government. Now, sir, if I 
am not greatly mistaken, that will be the necessary result of any 
of these measures. 

But, Mr. Speaker, gentlemen ask what are they to do ; are they 
to stand by and see these States go out at will ? Why, sir, if the 
Constitution does not give you the power of using force against 
these States, what else can you do ? If you had asked me the 
question a few years ago, I would have said, do not organize a 
sectional party to rule us. Had you asked it a few months ago, 1 
would have said, give us guarantees. If it be not too late now, I 
tell you to-day that you should give us guarantees of safety and 
protection under this Government, such as will secure us quiet and 



13 

safety now, henceforth, and forever. But that you will not do. 
Then I say, let those that choose go in peace. 

Much has been said, Mr. Speaker, about the conduct of these 
States in seizing the public property. I stand not here as the 
special defender'of these States. Many of their acts were illegal. 
But gentlemen must recollect that self-preservation is the first law 
of nature, of nations, and of men. Nations as well as men must 
provide for their own self-defense. They have taken only the pro- 
perty in their midst — the forts, &c., which you do not need, unless 
you intend to coerce them. This, gentlemen say, they cannot 
allow. For this they must make war. But what will your war 
avail you. 

Now, Mr. Speaker, 1 ask gentlemen at this point, if this w^ar is 
to come — and may God in his mercy avert it ! — what reason will 
you give to the world for making it ? If gentlemen who have been 
moef eager in pressing on warlike measures and making warlike 
speeches were to be those who would meet the brunt of the danger, 
the evil Avould be, perhaps, comparatively small. But when I come 
to consider the position in society, the professions and physical 
condition of those who are hottest for war, I cannot but believe 
that, when the tocsin sounds to arms, these gentlemen will lag far 
in the rear. No, sir; this battle'is not to be fought by them. It 
must be fought by the men who now live in peace and quiet in the 
cities, in the towns, in the villages, and in the country homes of 
the North. They are the men w^ho are to light this battte. What 
reason will you give for it to them ? Will you say that the southern 
States of the Confederacy seceded and made this thing necessary ? 
Let me tell you what I answer. We have had an organization in 
the larger section of the Union to control the weaker. The southern 
States have been asked to submit to the rule of a foreign and hos- 
tile organization during the future history of the country. Is it 
not a foreign organization ? Why, sir, when the Republican party 
was called to assemble in convention in Philadelphia, in 1856, no 
invitation even was extended to any slaveholding State ; and on 
the flag which they then unfurled to the breeze it is said there were 
but sixteen stars. Look again at the last election, and tell me 
whether this Eepublican organization has any effective strength in 
the South? None whatsoever, and never can have. & it not then 
a hostile organization ? 

Mr. LOVE JOY. I wish to correct a statement made by the 
gentleman. 

Mr. BOCOCK. I always desire to be courteous to every gentle- 
man on this floor ; but I have no time to yield now. 

Mr. LOVEJOY. I only wish to correct the gentleman on a 
question of fact. The gentleman is laboring under a mistake. 

Mr. BOCOCK. I am sorry for it. The gentleman will not say that 
the slaveholding States participated in the formation of the Repub- 
lican party. 

Mr. LOVEJ OY. I did not refer to that. I alluded to the num- 
ber of stars displayed on the flag. 

Mr. BOCOCK. Well, sir, as a matter of course I cannot verify 
my statement, for I was not present on that occasion, and did not 



14 

see it. But I state what I think was the report of the newspapers 
of that day. No gentleman can deny that the Republican party is 
a sectional party, and must, from the necessity of the case, always 
remain so; because, it being an organization hostile to our institu- 
tions, the southern States cannot willingly admit it in their midst. 
It is a hostile organization, I sa}', because its corner-stone is oppo- 
sition to the extension of our institutions. The rallying cry of that 
party is that our institutions are to be circumscribed and depressed, 
while those of the North are to be extended ; that our institutions 
are local and theirs national; that we are under the ban of the 
Government, and they and their institutions under its favor. 

The vitalizing and animating spirit of that party is hostility to 
African servitude, as it exists in our midst. Upon their success, 
had not the South reason to look out for the safety of their rights? 
Why, sir, one of your most distinguished men from the North, 
Mr. Fillmore, declared, in 1856, that the North, itself, would not 
submit to be ruled by a southern and hostile organization. The 
distinguished gentleman from Ohio, sitting near me, [Mr. Val- 
LANDiGHAM,] ill a spcecli made upon this floor two years ago, de- 
clared that, if the southern States constituted a majority, and 
should combine to rule the North, he, as a northern man, would 
resist them at the threshold, contest ever}- inch of ground, burn 
every blade of grass, and perish fighting in the last ditch. 

How many men upon this floor from the North have warned you 
that the South would not submit ! Was it to be expected that the 
South would prove less sensitive to her honor than her northern 
friends predicted ? When this hostile organization succeeded in 
obtaining the control of the Government, with the intention of 
maintaining that control for all future time, and imposing upon 
us their vill foi' our rule, was it to be expected, under these cir-^ 
cumstances, that the South would tamely acquiesce ? Was it not 
to be expected that the South should at least come here and ask 
for new guarantees for safety, equality, and peace ? 

What, then, do they get Avhen they come here ? You turn a 
deaf ear to their complaint ; you refuse, have refused, and still do 
refuse to afford such guarantees. Under such circumstances, will 
you call upon the masses of the North to tight your battles against 
the South ?, It is an easy matter to make the war, but it will be 
no easy matter to justify your course in the future. That question 
will come homo to you again and again: why have you made this 
war? It will roar upon you with the tempest, and wdiisper with 
the breezes. It will break upon your noonday thoughts and startle 
you in your midnight dreams. Wheu the thousands and tens of 
thousands who have been employed in the workshops of the North, 
manufacturing southern staples, or preparing fabrics ijpr the south- 
ern market, shall find themselves turned adrift, hungering and 
weak, without money, without credit, and without employment, they 
will ask, "Why is this so?" And, sir, when your hardy yeomanry 
are called to leave home and fireside and friends to march down 
and invade those who were recently their brethren, and never 
willingly their enemies, they will demand to know why is this so? 
While exposed to the dangers and hardships incident to the ser- 

V 



10 



vice to which j^oa have called them, during the long nights, while 
they lie unsheltered and unprotected upon'^the cold and wet earth, 
a call will come up from their midst, why is this so ? And on the 
bloody field of conflict, with the hot breath of battle breathing upon 
their brows, while the cannon balls mow their ranks, and their 
comrades fall thick and fast by their sides, even then, the dread in- 
quiry will leap to their lips, "Why is this so?" And, sir, from 
your cottages, scattered all over the North and the IsTorthwest, 
where the widows of those who fall in the conflict shall sit lonely 
and mournful in their widowhood, watching with aching hearts 
over children rendered fatherless, friendless, and unprotected by 
your act, I say, from all these cottages the cry shall come up, as if 
from the depths of misery and de'spair : why, oh, why is all this 
so? And, gentlemen, when you see hereafter the wide-spread de- 
vastation and ruin produced by your act, your own consciences, in 
tones sharper and keener than all, will demand of you, "Why is 
this so ?" Better meet the question now. Do not flatter yourselves 
that national patriotism can justify you. Do not tell the freemen 
of the North that the appeal is to their love of countrv, and that 
you call upon them to tight for the Union. It is a cheat and a de- 
lusion. It is not for the Union, not for the Union. You know 
well, that war not only cannot save the Union, but that it makes 
disunion both inevitable and perpetual. 

I repeat it, if they fight us, it is not to preserve the Union, but to 
preserve your party organization. 

^You built up your party on a principle of hostility to the South. 
You have obtained power on that basis. You are asked to give 
to the southern States guarantees of safety and peace. You stead- 
fastly refuse. Some of them seek to take themselves from under 
your rule, and you refuse that also. You will neither allow them to 
stay with honor, nor to go in peace. 

When the question shallcome, then, in thunder-tones, whv have 
you brought this great disaster upon the country? let your con- 
sciences answer back. We have done it, because we would do it. 

You must excuse me if I oppose your measures of preparation, 
and expose the consequences of your policy. I shall oppose you in 
such a course with all the energy I am master of. 

And now, sir, believing this bill to be one of the worst ever 
brought before Congress, and regarding it as certain to produce all 
the consequences of which I have spoken, revolting and lamenta- 
ble as they are, I now, in the conclusion of my remarks, desire to 
mark itwith peculiar reprobation. In the name of that Constitu- 
tion which it violates, I denounce it ; in the name of my constit- 
uents, whom it will injure, I denounce it ; in the name of the coun- 
try whose peace it will destroy, never more to be restored, I de- 
nounce it ; and in the name o'^f that humanity to which we all be- 
long, but which we so little honor, with renewed energ}-, and deeper 
emphasis, I denounce and execrate it. 

Note.— In order to show that African slavery ought not to be 
extended to the Territories, the course of argument, all through 
the North, is to attempt to prove it " a crime against humanity, 



16 

and a sin against God." This is the theme of every Republican 
harangue. And the school-house and the pulpit lend their active 
aid to the stump. The tendency is to poison the whole northern 
mind against us and our institutions. The history of John Brown, 
his raid, condemnation, execution, and apotheosis, well show how 
far this process has gone among the Republican masses at the 
North. He made a lawless invasion of a peaceful community, 
with a view to liberate the slaves, at the expense of the lives of the 
masters, if necessary. The blood of innocent citizens were shed. 
His fanaticism was the natural result of Republican teachings, 
operating upon a bigoted and fanatical spirit. His act was suffi- 
cient to fire with indignation every particle of healthy sentiment 
in the land. 

But a deep and widespread sympathy was manifested for him in 
the Republican sentiment of the ISTorth. His condemnation waB"""*"* 
resisted, and his execution earnestly deplored. The three leading .^ 
Republican newspapers in New York city, "TheTribune," "Times," 
and "Evening Post," all remonstrated against it, and thousands of 
petitions in his behalf were forwarded to Gov. Wise, of Virginia. 

After execution, his body was carried through the North in a 
sort of triumphal procession, crowds came out in the cities, the 
bells of the churches were rung, funeral orations were delivered, 
and his apotheosis was duly performed. Among those who did 
honor to his memory in Boston was John A. Andrew, who was 
immediately thereafter taken up and made Governor of Massa- 
chusetts. 

The raid of Brown into Virginia gave rise to committees of ex- 
aminations both in the Senate of the United States, and in the 
Virginia Legislature. It is clearly proven ift these examinations, 
not only that his intended raid was foreknown and aided by pro- 
minent citizens of the North, but that while he was in prison, 
awaiting execution of the sentence of death, extensive combina- 
tions were made in many parts of the North forcibly to effect his 
liberation. 

Want of room compels me to omit two extracts — the first from 
the Report of the Committee of the Virginia Legislature, written, 
it is said, by Hon. A. H. H. Stuart, of Staunton, and the other 
from the New York Tribune, the most infiuential Republican paper 
in the Union, sustaining the above. 



W. H. Moore, Printer, Penn. Avenue, corner of 1 1th street. 



54 Hf 



